Letter to the Editor: Humane Immigration Policy and a Borderless Economy

There is a dire need for immigration reform in America. This discussion has been going on for decades. Immigration policy has become a fight between humanitarian principles and a desire to close down the border to stop both drugs and people. In Obama’s State of the Union address he introduced his bipartisan plan which involves granting citizenship to the current illegal immigrants in the country and creating stricter policies to avoid future illegal immigration. However, the government has followed this cycle before, and the increased enforcement is both expensive and ineffective. Instead of continuing with our policies that have not worked, we should consider embracing the European model that has been effective.

Since the European Union came into existence it has had open trade between its member states. In 1957 the EU incorporated free movement of labor to support the improved trade. America has taken the first step with the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). NAFTA allows the free trade of goods between the U.S., Mexico and Canada. North America has only opened the border for movement of goods, but movement of people is just as important. America should take that next step and allow free movement of labor in order to alleviate the problems associated with illegal immigration.

Free movement of labor in the European Union effectively enables workers to legally obtain work in any nation in the Union. This policy allows workers to migrate to countries with prosperous economies and to avoid poor working conditions in their own countries. EU citizens are entitled to all labor rights in their country of work, including wage regulations, benefits, and work environment standards.

The United States would benefit from incorporating a similar policy into the North America Free Trade Agreement. Many people argue that free trade does not truly exist without free movement of labor. As a Political Science scholar writes, “the apparent paradox of U.S.–Mexico integration is that a barricaded border and a borderless economy are being created simultaneously.” [1] Free movement of labor would create a more balanced free market economy between the NAFTA countries so that they would have to compete to bring in businesses and workers. For instance, Mexico would be forced to lower taxes and improve working conditions in order to attract US companies and workers.

With free movement there would be no need for such exhaustive spending on border control. From 1996 to 2005, spending on border securitization increased from 200 million to 1.6 billion dollars. However, in 2006 there was an all-time high estimated illegal population. [2] Professor Sassen from University of Chicago states, “The results were the opposite of what the government aimed at: border militarization did not reduce the probability of illegal crossings on the US/Mexico border, forced unauthorized immigrants to stay longer than they wanted and to bring their families even when they would rather not.”[3]

The increased spending only makes border crossing more dangerous, and free movement would eliminate the high number of annual deaths crossing causes. [4] The country has invested so much time and money into border control, and it seems difficult and impossible to completely change the course of action. However, increased illegal immigration shows that America’s current direction on immigration policy is failing, and more spending will not be beneficial.

Free movement of labor would allow Mexican farm workers and other seasonal professionals to work in America but return to Mexico in the off-season. Increased border security causes the U.S. to unintentionally lock immigrants in the country because it is so difficult to reenter. Because of this, many illegal immigrants leave their families and send back their earnings. Others bring their families with them, and their children retain illegal status for the rest of their lives.

It can be argued that immigrants will become an additional cost that the government cannot support. However, the free movement policy is for the purpose of labor, and a job allows an immigrant to contribute to society and support himself. In the European Union, workers only have the right to residency in the country “provided that [they] do not become a burden on the finances of the host Member State.”[5] Thus, the United States could implement the same policy so that immigrants would not be here on welfare and do not become a public charge.

Currently, illegal laborers are unfairly exploited, and this inhumane commonality needs to be resolved. Many illegal laborers work in terrible conditions at very low wages. Because these laborers are classified as illegal, they cannot fight for better conditions or higher pay. Free movement allows a laborer to have the rights of a resident without becoming a full citizen.

Laborers come to America for opportunity and to improve their lives. However, their illegal status makes them criminals. They constantly face roadblocks in attempting to pursue the American dream. Illegal immigrant workers are not malicious criminals. They come to America with positive intentions and ambition. Currently, the American dream is a myth for these ambitious migrant workers, however, with free movement of labor it could become a reality.

Those opposed argue that “illegal aliens” are intruders and the country needs to protect itself from these outside forces. However, this xenophobic argument fails to recognize that immigrants are coming to America for the purpose of work and opportunity. Border patrol would only remain to control the drug market and other threats to national security. This focus would allow border security and police efforts to target actual criminality rather than just illegal crossings.

Free movement of labor alleviates issues associated with illegal immigrants and allows for a free market between the United States, Mexico, and Canada. America has a market of jobs for immigrants and needs to allow them to work legally without denying them basic human rights and fair working conditions.